wouldn't the worst time to have a heart attack be during a game of charades?

Swimming is a confusing sport. Sometimes you do it for fun, sometimes you do it to win a race, sometimes you do it so that you do not die.

A friend of mine was telling me that he was the designated driver one night while in college. He was taking his sister and four or five of her friends out for an evening of dancing and drinking. Whenever it was his turn to be the DD and take them out never really had fun and they had on occasion suggested that they go to a gay club. The reason being, that he was wanting to pick up girls at the bars they were usually going to and often wanted to leave early because he couldn't participate in the fun. One night he finally agreed but he was worried that he would be hit upon all night long. His experience was something different than he imagined. He was about 28 at the time and said all of the guys in the gate are worked easily between 19-22; all of them were studs, with six pack abs and looks like Brad Pitt. He just sat at the bar sipping on Coca-Cola all night while his sister and her friends have fun. Not one time did any guy hit upon him, that is until 1 AM when the last call announcement was made. Then guys were coming up to him asking him where he had been all night. That is when it hits him, he was the fat chick at the gay bar. He never complained about going to a dance club after that.

How many of you have played the dice game bunco? You know what that word means; it means gossiping while holding dice.

Ladies if you want to control your boyfriend or your husband what do you do? I think one of the most common answers is that you withhold sex. That is absolutely the wrong thing to do. Let me explain it this way; there is already a very, very long line of people not having sex with your boyfriend or husband. You don't see them running around doing stuff just to have sex with them all the time do you? If you want your husband or boyfriend to finish the to do list you gave him or help more around the house you should have sex with them all the time. That way your man knows he owes you big time and will keep doing things to make you happy so that you won't stop having sex with him. I can tell you what's going through his mind, I'm going to do all of this stuff and be back for fun time later.

Men are like bricks; our whole purpose in life is to get laid and then hang around the block with our bodies.

isn't it interesting that so many people, especially in the media and in the political elite, are criticizing Donald Trump for taking so long to name a secretary of state? He's interviewing more and more people and it is driving them crazy. These are the same people who were upset that Donald Trump was quickly naming people to other cabinet positions believing that he should wait 3-6 weeks to begin naming people to fill those posts. But isn't it better that he's taking his time on filling this position in his cabinet? This might be the most important position that he fills and he wants to make sure that the person he selects is not only competent but is generally in agreement with the principles that Donald Trump has espoused, not to mention that this person will be straightforward and honest with him. If you think that Trump is going to get any kind of fair break in the media, you are dead wrong.

Chicago's mayor, Rahm Emmanuelle, has said that Chicago will continue to be a sanctuary city, no matter what Donald Trump says as president. This past week, Mayor Emmanuelle said that he is putting aside $1 million of taxpayer money to provide legal representation for any illegal aliens that might be caught and sentenced to deportation. Given all the problems that Chicago has, lack of an effective police force; deteriorating public schools; underpaid teachers; deteriorating infrastructure, and so on, doesn't it seem more appropriate to have him put that $1 million somewhere else? The illegal aliens might be contributing to that taxpayer money but I would bet not as much as legal citizens. Why not pay the legal bills that some of those citizens have for being wrongly accused of crime by dirty cops? Or fighting the regulations that are onerous and unnecessary? They might want to use that to help the homeless veterans, but that would be too obvious. In the eyes of many of the left wing those homeless veterans are getting what they deserve because they were probably baby killers. We'll see what happens when Chicago loses its federal funding. They will be able to pay their teachers, police men and women, or fire department but at least the illegal aliens will have attorneys.

The left wing is all up in arms because Donald Trump took a phone call from the president of Taiwan. They are saying that we are offending the Chinese government, a government that we need to help fight climate change, to control North Korea, and to not call in our debt, much of which they own. First of all, China has done absolutely nothing that they are obligated to do by agreement and treaty regarding stopping pollution or so-called climate change. Neither have they done anything to stop North Korea's nuclear weapons program or to stop North Korea from selling military equipment and technology to terrorist nations and groups. Certainly they are primarily a communist country and have been oppressive to the people of China, with a few notable exceptions where they have created free market zones. Why would they be upset, those on the left, that we would actually take a phone call from a democratic government? Why would we let a communist dictatorship tell us how to run our foreign-policy? The only reason the left has is because they are scared of China. We should be reaching out to a democracy and helping them to remain a democracy when China has been threatening them increasingly with annexation. What Trump did is the right move.

Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel has been at the forefront of the movement to bring middle eastern refugees into all the countries of Europe. Germany has let millions and millions of them into their country and they are now regretting it for a variety of reasons. Chancellor Merkel has now called for a ban on anyone wearing burkas. There is legal precedent in that country for enforcing such a ban. Essentially Germany's Constitution and laws allow for such actions if it threatens security and safety. There is no doubt that covering your head and face so that people cannot see you does threaten the safety and security of the German people. You need to be able to check identification and confirm the person standing in front of you is the person that is supposed to be there or who is who they say they are. Of course the left-wing is up in arms calling and discrimination as are many Muslim organizations. Maybe if so many of the terrorists were not wearing burkas it would not be a need to have such a ban.

Pres. Obama has made a private agreement with the government of Australia that will bring 2500 illegal immigrants to America from Australia. We will send them 2500 illegal immigrants as well but there is a huge difference in the makeup of those two groups. We are going to send 2500 illegal immigrants who originated from Costa Rica and who are Catholic, to Australia. They may not want to go but they do not have a choice. Can you imagine how hard it will be for them to visit their homeland? We should be sending them back to Costa Rica but that's another point for another day. In return Australia is going to send us 2500 Islamic terrorists. All 2500 have been held in Australian jails and prisons not only for coming to that country illegally be because some of them were found to be terrorists or have strong terrorist ties. At least two of the group are high on our terrorist wanted list and a number of others or on the terrorist watch list that our State Department puts out. Why would we make such an agreement? I've said in the past that I refuse to put the tinfoil hat on but when you look at the totality of Pres. Obama's actions regarding allowing potential terrorists into our country you have to wonder what his real motives are.

yesterday I put a post on my Facebook page that said, "the best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter". Winston Churchill did not know how much that would be true 60 years or 70 years later. I then had an experience at the local establishment while having an adult beverage that just absolutely brought that point home.

I was sitting at the bar talking to a member of the wait staff who had finished his shift and was having an adult beverage. There was a chair in between us that was empty and after a while the manager at the bar and sat down between us. He had been there earlier in this particular person that waited on him. The man said he had gone to the Silver City planning and zoning commission meeting. He was extremely frustrated with the way the meeting was run and his version of how he was treated by the "all-female panel". Now he went on to say that he had been in education his entire career, over 30 years and had no problem working with women. however based on subsequent comments, I'm not sure I believe him. That is a story for another day.

his big complaint was the lack of coherency in the city's zoning regulations. He pointed out that it is difficult to move a single wide, even if it's a 2015 model, into certain areas of the city. He's correct. He also complained that in some areas you will have nice, site built homes next to trailer parks that have run down 40, 50, or 60-year-old trailers. I listened to his tirade for a bit and then asked where he had come from. He came to Silver city from El Paso. He said that El Paso's zoning ordinances were idyllic and perfect. I pointed out that El Paso country club, a place with beautiful homes, is right next to a commercial area and a trailer park is nearby. No different than what we have in Silver City. He accepted my point as being accurate but still said that El Paso was much better. That's fine, that's his opinion.

So I asked him what he would do about changing our zoning ordinances and regulations. His very quick and very stern response was, "I don't know". I suggested that he propose changing the ordinances to allow newer single wide mobile or modular homes to be moved into those areas. He thought that was okay but still complained. I asked what changes he would make to tell people who own the property that the trailer parks were built upon what they can do with their property. Again, he was stumped. The conversation did not go on much longer but he still had no solutions or suggestions.

This is the perfect example of why we do not have a democracy. This is also the perfect example of why our kids education has lagged over the last 3 to 4 decades. This educator, and I use that term loosely, liked to complain when something did not meet his expectations but was unable to offer any solution. He had no critical thinking skills. However he was adamant that he would attend the next planning and zoning commission meeting to tweak the chairperson, who he believes did not like him because he pointed out all of the things that are wrong with the zoning regulations. This is also a perfect example of why we need to bring back lawn darts and clean the gene pool.

the attack on students at Ohio State University by a Sudanese immigrant has brought this situation back to the forefront. The attacker claimed in social media posts and an article in the student newspaper at Ohio State University that he felt uncomfortable praying in public. He believed, because what he had read in the mainstream media, made him believe that he would be attacked for practicing his religion. He was angry with Ohio State University for not providing more prayer rooms for Muslims. Now why would he believe that he would be targeted for practicing his religion? Certainly the elite in the media and political circles have gone out of their way to make excuses for radical Muslims who kill people. In fact, they have embraced the Muslim religion as one that we should, essentially promote, as a religion of peace.

Part of the reason he might have believed that comes from the last election when the left wing claimed that we were going to see a wave of anti-Muslim bigotry sweep the nation were Donald Trump to win the election. He did win and we have yet to see such a wave of attacks materialize. There have been a handful of over hyped anecdotes many of which only exist on social media and some of which have been proven to be staged and faked. Here's a little factoid for you left wing nuts: Donald Trump got three times as many votes from the Muslim community than did Mitt Romney. How is it that the Islamic community supported Donald Trump when the only thing you heard from Hillary Clinton, the mainstream media, and the left wing is that Donald Trump was going to start registering Muslims and deport them or put them in camps? Maybe it's because he never said such things? Maybe it's because all he said was that he wanted to tighten up immigration from certain areas of the world where terrorists were known to be based? The same exact thing that Obama did in 2012 and not one of you raised a finger or opposed his actions.

This past week on the Clinton news network, Alyson Camerota started talking about our need to show solidarity with Muslim women. She and her co-anchor were discussing a story about how Muslim women were in fear of being attacked simply because they were wearing the hijab. Now you can't find any new stories were this is actually happening but because they have an irrational fear of being attacked simply because they are Islamic, the mainstream media picks up on it and runs with it. Let's forget the attacks upon Christian, Jewish, Buddhist women being conducted by Muslim men who are offended by the fact that they show too much skin or are in public without a male family member. Do a search for these types of attacks and it's easy to find them. But Camerota was adamant that non-Islamic women should wear that hijab to show solidarity and support for the group that is being discriminated against.

Now let's turn this to a similar story but change the victim to a Christian couple. There is not a lot of outrage about this attack because it's okay in this country as far as the left-wing is concerned to attack Christians for their beliefs. Chip and the Joanna Gaines are the hosts of the cable television show "Fixer Upper". They have built quite a business, not only before their show became a hit but since then as well. If you have not seen the show, basically he is a contractor that remodeled homes. She is an interior decorator and puts the finishing touches on the homes for people. They have now opened a store, put their names on a line of paint and other household goods, essentially been entrepreneurs and created a nice living for themselves.

However because they are devout Christians the website BuzzFeed felt it was necessary to attack them. They made fun of the fact that Joanna said God told her several years ago to close her store and her business and spend more time with her young children. Four years later God told her to reopen the store and go back into business. They are members of a church in Waco Texas that is nondenominational but their pastor has been very vocal in speaking out against same-sex marriages. So the author of the story wonders if the Gaines share his views completely or not. They wonder if a same-sex couple might be featured on their show as has been done on other similar shows on HGTV. They wonder if the gains are bigoted and discriminate against others and essentially say it's not fair that they have made so much money if they do share those beliefs. Certainly if you watched the show you know that there is never any preaching about those beliefs they don't force their beliefs on anyone they live their life in a manner that they think is correct and never mention things like same-sex marriage or other hot button issues.

The author then opines that people like the Gaines are the reason that Muslim women are afraid for their well-being in this country. Isn't it interesting that the worst thing Christians have done when it comes to the LGBT community has been to refuse to bake them a cake, so that flowers, or rent a wedding venue to them; Yet throughout the world and in America we see Muslims attacking and killing people for being openly homosexual, gay, lesbian, or transgender. They have been stoned to death or thrown off of high-rise buildings. Yet the ones who are persecuted for their belief system is the Christians and not the Muslims. We are constantly told that Christians must be tolerant of others but don't Christians have a right to express their beliefs? Yes and if they unfairly discriminate against any minority group, there are laws to protect them and punish the bigots. But not selling them a cake or flowers shouldn't fall under the purview of these laws. Attacking and killing them however should. Keeping them from obtaining housing or employment should be punished. When did the right to refuse service stop at the door of Christianity? When is the left wing going to show solidarity with Christians? I doubt we will see it in our lifetime.

one of the things that many people do to convince others of their opinion or their position on an issue is use big words, often incorrectly, but stringing them together will impress the low information voter and convince that person that the or writer is correct. There is also a modicum of logic, I use that term loosely, that also helped to convince the general public of the stance that the person is taking. So it goes with California and their attempts to curb man caused global warming.

Back in September Governor Moonbeam, known officially as Jerry Brown, signed a law that regulates methane created by dairy cattle and other livestock. According to the global warming alarmist crowd, 14.5% of "human induced greenhouse gas emissions", from beef and dairy production operations. If you think that might be an accurate statement, understand that first of all Pauline are not human and second of all the source for that factoid is the United Nations. No California has been on the forefront of trying to reduce carbon emissions and producing renewable energy. So to control methane produced by cattle, which the immature side of me says I have to tell you those are cow farts, is the next "logical" step. The goal is to reduce methane emissions from Terry's and livestock operations to 40% below 2013 levels in the next 14 years.

Ryan McCarthy is a science advisor for the California air resources Board and is one of the key authors of the regulations and laws that will accomplish this goal. He of course believes that what they are doing in California will be a model for the rest of the world. While he does agree that this will drive up costs for dairy farmers especially, he believes the benefits far outweigh the potential disastrous side effects. Paul Sousa, Dir. of environmental services for Western United Dairymen, believes this is a very foolish position for the state of California to take and that the cost of complying with the regulations will cause dairy farmers to leave the state.

Sousa says that many farmers have already started to move to states where not only these at regulations don't exist but it's unlikely they will be implemented in the foreseeable future. Some of the things that the California air resources Board are asking farmers to do is change the diet of their cattle. With dairy farmers especially this could not only change the quality of the product, but could also reduce the output from each milk giving cow further straining the ability of farmers to make a living.

The New Hope Dairy, owned by Arlen Van Groningen, a third-generation farmer has been one of the first dairy farmers to comply with the new regulations. One of the things California has done is set aside $50 million to help dairy farmers purchase methane digesters which will store methane gas produced by the cattle and the manure they create and use that gas to create electricity. Sounds really nice doesn't it? Reducing enteric commissions, again one of those fancy phrases, by converting it into energy. Here's the little problem, a single methane digester costs $4 million. Van Groningen Has partnered with California Biogas to create electricity for the Sacramento municipal utility District. Arlen admits that there is no way he could afford to buy the digester himself. But there are 1500 dairies currently operating in the state of California; at a cost of $4 million apiece that would mean the state needs to shell out almost $6 billion. Or the farmers have to bear that cost themselves which is economically unfeasible. The return on the sale of methane gas does not offset the cost for decades.

Even those farmers who want to comply and do their heart admit there is no way this can work from an economic standpoint. It's much easier to purchase property elsewhere and move all of your cattle and equipment than it is to buy everything you need to comply with California's laws. So California continues to take steps to run businesses out of their state and too often to other countries rather than other states. Thus taking not only jobs, but uprooting families, and decreasing tax revenue for those of you that worry about that type of thing.

As we have said there are number of scientific studies that prove bovine methane emissions are negligible in creating global warming or climate change or whatever phrase they're going to use this year. The amount of human induced greenhouse gases is negligible compared to what the earth itself produces through volcanoes for example. But below information voter certainly wants to leave the world a better place and if this sounds like it's possible they'll go along with it.

Many of us criticized Glorious Leader's nuclear agreement with Iran. There are many reasons to criticize the deal but among those was the increased freedom that Iran's government would have to export terrorism to other countries. No one disagrees that Iran has been supporting ISIS and Hezbollah, but their ability to support them has been limited due to the economic sanctions that had been in place prior to the deal being struck. Now that Iran is able to openly sell oil and travel restrictions have been lifted, they have increased their support for those terrorist organizations.

One of the aspects of the deal was Iran's ability to purchase commercial airliners openly. Boeing and Airbus were granted permission by the Obama administration to sign contracts with Iran's government and sell them commercial airliners. Our intelligence services along with international intelligence services said this was a bad idea. It ran had been using their limited fleet of commercial airliners to smuggle weapons to Hezbollah and ISIS. Israeli government officials warned our administration that Iran's planes were landing in Damascus and Lebanon and now those flights have increased. It is clear that Iran is offloading weapons which are then being transported to terrorist groups.

It is not much of a stretch to believe that Iran's government will use those same commercial airliners that are being built and soon will be delivered to them as weapons. let's not forget 9/11 and how our planes were used against us. Iran's government is probably developing plans to use some of their planes as weapons in Europe or against Israel. It's not much of a stretch to see them loading a plane with nuclear material that they have been allowed to develop and crashing it somewhere in Europe. The destruction and loss of life would be massive.

Congress has requested information from Obama's administration as to what safeguards are being put in place or what plans are in place should such an attack be detected. They are also wondering why Iran is being allowed to continually deliver weapons and other supplies to terrorist groups. So far Obama's administration has refused to answer the inquiries. It's just more evidence that not only fuels conspiracy theories, especially those that claim Obama is actively supporting the spread of Islam, but certainly that he does not have America's best interests at heart and rather puts other countries interests ahead of hours. I don't remember everything Obama claimed the Iranian nuclear agreement what do, but I'm sure it's accomplishing all of his goals; God knows it has accomplished everything and more that Iranians government wanted it to do.

the tragedy at Ohio State University this week brings up a lot of questions that no doubt have the liberal minds spinning. Of course, after something like this happens, liberals call for the banning of guns, as a gun is usually or often used in these types of attacks. But this attack did not use a gun, the killer used a car and a butcher knife before he was stopped from harming or murdering more people by an officer with a gun. The heads of many anti-gun advocates must be spinning out of control right now, given that the gun in this story is the "the good guy".

Liberals must also be upset with the idea that the killer, Abdul Razak Ali Artan, is an immigrant to the United States from Somalia. Somalia is one of those countries that is known to have a high terrorist population and a government that has supported terrorism in the past. Abdul emigrated here a few years ago with his family after living in Pakistan for seven years. This is the type of person who would be affected under Donald Trump's immigration plan before being allowed to enter this country and before being granted permanent residency.

As of right now, we don't know a lot about his motivation but we can clean some facts from what he has said in the past. Abdul was interviewed for the Ohio State University student newspaper not too long ago. He complained that Ohio State University was so big and did not have enough prayer rooms for Muslims. When he first arrived, he said he did not know where to go to pray so he ended up finding a corner of the building that was hidden from the view of the general public. He said that he was afraid to pray in public given the media's portrayal of Muslims and his resulting fear that he would be attacked or stereotyped.

Obviously, Abdul has not had much experience with the mainstream media or the attitude on college campuses around America. Both of them lean over backwards to accommodate Muslims and ensure that they have everything they need to practice their religion and that their rights are protected, often at the expense of the rights of others. But the clear gist of his comments in that article and in other forums is that he was angry and Ohio State for not providing him enough clarity in where he could practice his religion.

If you follow the "logic" of liberals when it comes to discussing what should be done with guns after an attack such as this, we should now ban cars and butcher knives. We have said this as have many of the people when the anti-gun advocates called for various measures to control and limit our second amendment rights, if guns were not readily available, murderers and terrorists would find other means to commit the atrocity. In this case he used a car and a butcher knife. Banning the tool is not the answer.

Also, we must give a shout out to the members of the military at Ohio State University, whether they were veterans or members of the ROTC, multiple students said when they heard the commotion and the gunshots, our military men and women ran towards the gunshots. They ran to help others and put themselves in harm's way. That is what a hero does. And to the officer who responded in the same manner and stop further harm, good job. To those of you who believe that guns have no place on college campuses, here is the perfect example of why they do belong. Compare what happened here to those shootings on college campuses where no one anti-gun. How long did the perpetrator continue to inflict injury and death before he or she was stopped?

over the years we have documented on these pages the myths about climate change being caused by man. In fact we've shown time and again the science behind our Earth's climate that not only shows global warming is not occurring, (thus the change in nomenclature from global warming to climate change), but that there is hard data showing that the claimant is not doing what the alarmists said it would do. We've also shown you the data that says not all scientists agree with the conclusions of the climate change alarmists.

Yet another study has found that all of the handwringing, crying, and alarmism regarding Antarctica is once again false. Scientists have been reviewing data from satellites and other data gathering devices and comparing those readings with data documented and obtained by Ernest Shackleton, the famous Antarctic Explorer who failed in his attempt to map the continent because of not only the harsh weather conditions but the amount of ice at our South Pole. Researchers have determined that the amount of ice located on the seventh continent is essentially no different than it was in 1917. In fact it's not only Shackleton's expedition that several other expeditions that documented as well is it was possible at the time the amount of sea ice they encountered on their expeditions.

This is combined with satellite data that shows the depth of the ice at the South Pole has increased over the last two decades at least rather than decrease as many global alarmists would have you believe. They also indicate that the temperature is steady and cooling slightly, as is the temperature around the world, as opposed to what the CRU said earlier this month about the temperature at the South Pole being the highest in recorded history. It's not even close.

But as we have told you before and you know inherently, the global warming/climate change alarmists making a lot of money off of being chicken little. If they were to be honest with you about all the data, the inaccuracy of their predictions, and the fact that man could not change the climate if we really tried they would lose that income. I also believe that they are afraid of losing credibility by admitting they were wrong, but a good scientist never lets their ego get in the way of the truth. A good scientist will admit they were wrong when the data proves it. But then again, these people are not real scientists, they are moneymaking machines.

Fidel Castro finally died at the age of 90. Of course the left wing around the world are applauding is creation, his leadership, and most of all, his love for the working class. For many elitists on the left, Castro was a great ideal. Overthrowing a government in Cuba that had created one of the largest middle-class economies in the Western Hemisphere. Before Castro, tourism was a huge industry and average citizens were able to open their own businesses and become very comfortable if not rich. Literacy was high, healthcare was available to all and food was plentiful. People were able to buy their own homes, cars and take vacations. Putting food on their table was not a concern for most. To be sure that were still poor people in Cuba but there are everywhere. Then Castro came along with his communist ideals and if you listen to the left wing, especially the rich and delete on the left side of the aisle, Cuba became a workers paradise under Castro.

Let's ignore the rampant corruption in government circles. Let's ignore the fact that now the average Cuban lives in abject poverty and everything is given to them by the government. Remember when Cuba's great leader said that he was going to give every Cuban household a rice cooker? All the people were overjoyed. How is that a better situation than what they used to live in? You look at the cars around Cuba, they are 50, 60, and 70 years old. Very few of them run and most of them have been parted out to keep the others running. Yes, the political elite have everything they want but the average Cuban citizen does not.

You can also ignore, as the left wing does, the jailing and killing of anyone who disagrees with Castro. Dissidents are not tolerated and their families are terrorized if those who speak out against Castro go into hiding. There is not a free press there. Freedom of speech is not tolerated and the only reason many of the average Cuban citizens put on a happy face is because they are afraid of being jailed or killed. They have to toe the dictator's line.

Of course we have heard about the health care system in Cuba and how it is so great that health care is free for everyone. What people like Michael Moore do not tell you, remember he made a movie touting Castro's health care system, is that there are really three healthcare systems in Cuba.

First of all there is excellent health care available in Cuba; just not for the average Cuban citizen. The first system caters to foreigners. There is excellent health care available to those who show up for what many call "medical tourism". Many of the procedures available to the foreigners are what we would call vanity procedures; breast enhancement, Botox treatments, Lypo-suction, and plastic surgery. Foreigners pay in hard currency which the regime needs desperately.

The second system also gives access to above-average healthcare providers to the political elite. Those in power, along with their families, and the cultural elite have access to the same system that the foreigners do. The medical care is above average and in some cases top-notch. But the availability of those doctors, nurses, and medical equipment and facilities is limited. The average Cuban does not have access to those facilities.

Then there is the system that is available to everybody else that is a Cuban citizen. It is wretched. If you must go to a clinic or hospital that is available to the average Cuban citizen, the facilities are crumbling, medical equipment is outdated and most cases does not work. Conditions are unsanitary to say the least and patients must bring their own bedsheets, blankets, soap, food, even light bulbs. Medicine is very scarce and most people must purchase aspirin or antibiotics on the black market, often giving up two weeks worth of pay to get just a couple of pills.

But of course the left wing ignores the facts, ignores the real details, because they want to believe in the ideal of communism, that everyone is equal, that everyone has access to great medical care, greater living conditions, and there is a chicken in every pot. Nowhere in the history of the world has this ever worked on a large scale. But the left wing will never give up on it so this week as they remember Fidel Castro, they will lie to you, either knowingly or unknowingly, about how great things were in Cuba and how terrible they were before Castro. Sadly, many of you will not take the time to do the research, it is plentiful and it's available, to find out that Castro was a horrible person who was a tyrant when it came to ruling Cuba.

we have long talked on these pages and the radio show about the decline of our educational system in America. No longer do we teach kids how to think or give them an accurate picture of history, but now it's an indoctrination more concerned with being politically correct. We get so many examples of how ignorant our young people are, whether it is from videos like Water's World or Facebook posts that it is scary.

I saw a post as part of a thread in which a young woman expresses her opinion about the Constitution of the United States. But remember, many liberals want to do away with our Constitution saying it is a living document and needs to be updated or scrapped completely. It is not a living document because those principles upon which we were founded do not change. However, I do understand the fact that it can be amended so in that sense maybe it is a bit of a living document. But things like the right to free speech, the right to congregate, freedom of religion, and those principles do not change and evolve over time. To say they do, is like saying that gravity changes over time and it does not. Our understanding of gravity might change, but gravity doesn't change.

But here is what this young woman said about our Constitution, "oh dear, I think you better brush up on your history. That Constitution is so outdated, it isn't funny. It was put in place during the war in the south so as people in the farming areas could defend their properties against an opposing army that may try to take it over during the Civil War. It absolutely no longer applies today.

This young woman, based upon her picture is not 13 or 14 years old but is easily in her 20s maybe even mid-20s. I'm sure to some extent that she was exposed to the actual history of our country and the Constitution but certainly she was not held to any standard of learning that required her to remember our history. Really?! The Constitution was written during the Civil War to protect farmers from opposing armies? How pathetic is that a woman could get to this age and not to know at least a modicum of truth about our country's history. Sadly she is not alone. If I were a teacher or professor of hers I would be ashamed. Somehow I think that her past teachers and professors are proud of the job they have done. I think I need a safe zone after reading that.